White Knight Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 I'm saying why is it basically you look at the other Gospel accounts, including John's but why do you exclude John's for being Truth? Why dont you think the book of Acts picked up where John Left Off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 [quote name='White Knight' date='Jul 21 2005, 12:59 PM']I'm saying why is it basically you look at the other Gospel accounts, including John's but why do you exclude John's for being Truth? Why dont you think the book of Acts picked up where John Left Off? [right][snapback]652730[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Because Acts of the Apostles was written before the Gospel of John. Hence, how could Acts pick up where John left off? John hadn't written yet. :shades: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeDee Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 I asked a couple of priests about the "Double Ascension" and was told that indeed Jesus ascended to the Father the same day he was resurrected, but not immediately. Remember he told Mary Magdalen not to touch him because he had not ascended to the Father? In a footnote in Matthew it said that Jesus ascended the same day as the Resurrection, and then ascended again 40 days later ending his corporal life on earth. This footnote appeared in the New American Bible. My question is: If there were two ascensions why doesn't anybody ever talk about it????? It is never mentioned in homilies at Easter, never mentioned in Catholic Schools. What gives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 [quote name='DeeDee' date='Jul 21 2005, 01:36 PM']I asked a couple of priests about the "Double Ascension" and was told that indeed Jesus ascended to the Father the same day he was resurrected, but not immediately. Remember he told Mary Magdalen not to touch him because he had not ascended to the Father? In a footnote in Matthew it said that Jesus ascended the same day as the Resurrection, and then ascended again 40 days later ending his corporal life on earth. This footnote appeared in the New American Bible. My question is: If there were two ascensions why doesn't anybody ever talk about it????? It is never mentioned in homilies at Easter, never mentioned in Catholic Schools. What gives? [right][snapback]652787[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Both Luke and Acts are speaking about the final corporal Ascension. See Luke24:51 "As he blessed them he parted from them and was taken up to heaven." And if you read chapter 24 in its entirety, this was the same day as the Resurrection. No second Ascension for Luke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 I thought I posted on this thread lastnight.. huh.. weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Threads in which LittleLes posts all end up looking alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 21 2005, 01:25 PM']RESPONSE: Because Acts of the Apostles was written before the Gospel of John. Hence, how could Acts pick up where John left off? John hadn't written yet. :shades: [right][snapback]652764[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Whats your source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 20 2005, 05:20 PM']RESPONSE: Thank you for calling to my attention this Apostolic Constitution, a noninfallible letter of Pope John Paul II, claiming that the (new) Catechism of the Catholic Church is "a sure norm for teaching the faith." "659 "So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God." Christ's body was glorifed at the moment of His Resurrection, as proven by the new and supernatural properties it subsequently and premanently enjoys." But during the forty days when he eats and drinks familarly with His disciples and teaches them the about the kingdom, His glory remains under apparition veiled under the appearance of ordinary humanity." If the Pope is correct, then Luke's gospel is wrong as to Jesus ascending on Easter Sunday. Actually, I thought White Knight had raised a valid point. Is it reasonable to assume that Jesus remained on earth for forty days after his Resurrection interacting with his followers and yet nothing of what he said or did was recorded in Acts? I guess the pope thought so! [right][snapback]651484[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You [i]obviously[/i] didn't read CCC 659. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 Well think about it, you have so many people who were willing to Die because of Jesus at the time. Whos to say they didn't See Him in His Glorified Body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 [quote name='thedude' date='Jul 21 2005, 04:03 PM']You [i]obviously[/i] didn't read CCC 659. [right][snapback]653076[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Oh, But I did. To explain away two differing Ascesnion accounts which conflict as to time and place, we create two Ascensions. What could be simpler! But then there would have had to be a Decension too. (And just why would a body have to ascend to be glorified?) Luke says Jesus "parted" from the Apostles on Easter Sunday. I guess he didn't know that Jesus would return and then ascend again since his gospel ends with the "first" Ascension. :thinking: Of course, the more reasonable explanation is that we're dealing with differing legends here and different writers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 Actually according to the Catechism, Jesus's Body was already Glorified after the Resurrection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 so how long do you suppose it took them to get to Bethany? it doesn't say It doesn't say that was the same day. the NAB footnote is not part of sacred scripture and could be a misinterpretation very easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted July 22, 2005 Author Share Posted July 22, 2005 Well if you read the entire chapter of Luke 24, You will notice time differences..... plus people had to walk everywhere, so if they traveled to a different place in Israel, that takes some time, plus, He (Jesus); ate with some people, later in the evening..... of that Reserrection Day. thats like half of the chapter there. point is, Luke wasn't talking about Christ ascending on High on Easter Sunday, but rather a different day, because, Luke did right the gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts. and Book of Acts is basically alittle bit of a filler of what happened during this time. Plus I was right, about 500 something people seeing Jesus after the Resurrection, check 1 Corthinians 15:6 for that. I'll post it later but I'm eating. But my point is. If people saw the Glorified Christ in His New Glorified Body, He'd have to be around aleast awhile for 500+ people to see Him. They didn't have radio or television then, and walking took half a day or days even to get to your next location. The time difference, displays that Jesus stayed around for aleast 40 days after the Resurrection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted July 22, 2005 Author Share Posted July 22, 2005 Luke 24:1 "Now on the first day of the week, [b]very early in the morning[/b], they and certian other women with them, came to the tomb bringing spices which they had prepared." Luke 24:29 "But they constrained Him saying [b]'Abide with us, for it is towards evening, and the day is far spent.'[/b] And He went in to stay with them." Okay that claims right there that Jesus did not Ascend on Same Day of his Resurrection, Because He's still doing other things At this time He hasn't even appeared to His disciples yet. Luke 24:31 "Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him, and He had Vanished from their sight." Luke 24:33 "So they rose up at that very hour and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven and those who were with them gathered together." All this was before Jesus met up with the disciples. Luke is most likely talking days between what happened... as the other Gospels do. Luke 24:36-42 is when Jesus finally arrives and reveals himself to His disciples. Most likely this is a different day. Luke 24:50-53 mention nothing of Jesus ascending on high into heaven on the same day as the Resurrection. There had to be some day differences between Luke 24:36-42 -43-53. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 [quote]Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples said to him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." [b]Now a week later[/b] his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you." [i]John 20:23-26[/i][/quote] John has Christ appearing long after the Ressurection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now